[PD] Very large patches unstable?

Jonathan Wilkes jancsika at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 3 03:12:06 CET 2009

--- On Wed, 12/2/09, Matteo Sisti Sette <matteosistisette at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Matteo Sisti Sette <matteosistisette at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [PD] Very large patches unstable?
> To: "Mathieu Bouchard" <matju at artengine.ca>
> Cc: pd-list at iem.at
> Date: Wednesday, December 2, 2009, 11:01 PM
> Mathieu Bouchard escribió:
> > It's not that easy with commercial software
> either.  [...]
> Well I was just implying that with commercial software I
> feel the RIGHT to complain about bugs and EXPECT (in the
> sense of "demand" in english, lol, not of real expectation)
> them to be fixed, because software is the only field where
> you BUY something that does not work and are even supposed
> to accept that, which I don't.
> I didn't imply that companies will do what I would expect
> them to do according to what I think is their moral duty.
> Indeed business strategy will usually push them to the
> exactly opposite direction. They will wait for the next
> majour release to fix bugs, so that you pay again for
> something you have already bought.
> That's why I think nobody should ever pay for software.
> Well, I would indeed be happy to pay for software if it was
> bug free, but if I take for true what seems to be an almost
> universally shared opinion, that bug free software does not
> and won't ever exist, then I must conclude, that nobody
> should pay for software.

Do you mean to say that "nobody should pay for _proprietary_ software?"  
Otherwise, I don't understand how your conclusion follows from your 
argument, because free software has no obligation to follow the business 
model you describe (well, neither does proprietary software, for that 
     Besides, how is it that "existence of bug" = "the software doesn't 
work?"  Buggs can exist without makking software inoperable, you konw.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list